About your Search

20121128
20121206
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7
opposed, 9. abstained, 41. >> the floor is to the secretary general of the united nations. >> mr. president, excellencies, ladies and gentleman, an important vote has taken place today in the general assembly. the decision [indiscernible] i stand ready to fulfill my role and report to this assembly, as requested in the resolution. my question has been consistent. the palestinians have a right to their own independent state. israel has the right to live in peace and security with its neighbors. there is no substitute for negotiations. today's vote underscores the urgency of meaningful negotiations. we must give a do impetus to ensure an independent democratic state of palestine lives with a secure state of israel. i urge the parties to renew their commitment for negotiating peace. i count on all to act responsibly, preserve your treatment in state building under the leadership of president abbas and the prime minister. thank you. [applause] >> i think the secretary-general of the united nations for a statement. >> we will break away from the united nations where they have approved
made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 243. the nays are 170. the resolution is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut seek recognition? >> thank you, mr. speaker. by the direction of the democratic caucus, i offer a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 822, resolved, that the following named members be and are hereby elected to the following standing committees of the house of representatives -- one, committee on agriculture, mr. garamendi. two, committee on science, space and technology, mr. curson. mr. larson: i ask that the resoluti
of the interim government of mali, ecowas, the african union, the united nations, neighboring states and others in the international community to prepare a military response in accordance with international law, address the threat of terrorists and extremists in northern mali. the threat of military force has contributed, we think, to a change in some of the northern groups, as witnessed by the recent willingness to have mnla and other members to renounce their efforts to establish an independent state in northern mali. the military concept proposed by ecowas and endorsed by the african union provides a found eags for planning a proposed military intervention in northern mali. however, several key questions must be answered to ensure that this response is well planned, well resourced, and appropriate. these issues include among other things the required force levels, the cost in funding needs, the logistical requirement the operational timeliness, the protection of civilians and ensuring that the proposed military action is adequately linked to a political strategy and an end state for military
by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 398. the nays are two. one recorded as present. 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the unfinished business is the question on agreg to the speaker's approval of the journal on which the yeas and nays were ordered. the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expr
point. on your second point, the opec nations in being friends of the united states, i think the answer to that is that both sides have had a relationship that has been economically necessary, but i do not think the opec cartel conducts its affairs in a way to benefit the united states of america. they conduct their affairs so that they do not kill the goose that laid the golden egg. if you turn into the record on pages 8 and 9, you're asking for some visual clues as to what's going on here. if you look on page 8 coming will see the united states is paying about $20 million per month to import petroleum. you see the sharp rise in the line just before 2008 and then it sort of flat lines from 2008 going through the significant dip that was represented by the subprime mortgage meltdown. what's interesting about it is from that point forward it has remained about 50% of the balance of payments and deficits. that is because the oil cartel prices the marginal barrel of oil as what it costs to get it out of the ground and what the maximum is that they cannot pay without tipping the consumers o
free market economics you want talent and youth coming to this country. if you're a national security conservative, why is the united states going to run the world or be very important and powerful in the world in 100 years and japan isn't? because one, they forget to have kids and they don't do immigration. china, same thing. and europe the same thing. immigration is our competitive advantage against the rest of the world as an economic power, a military power. >> so what other wounds would you look at? >> that's one piece. i think we need to look at -- and our candidates. we ran a candidate, rahmny, who was a great guy much he's not what the 86% of obama's ads said about him. but how do you make the case of how rahmny would govern when he was governor of massachusetts for four years, pre-tea party. >> let's stipulate rahmny was a bad candidate. how would you get a better one? >> there are 30 republican governors. 24 of them have republican legislatures which is what rahmny didn't have. he had 83% democratic legislature. he was a goaly. they just shot goals on him for four years and
this zero sum-game splash and instead leads the nation in ways that only one person can do. that is the president of the united states. house republicans are prepared to get to yes. house republicans are not prepared to get to foolish. and it is foolish to reject president obama's own self-described architecture of $3 -- or $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in new revenue. so we're prepared to work and we call on the white house to do the same thing. >> speaker boehner, president obama -- [inaudible] the fox news poll after the november election said 60% of voters supported this going up. a new poll in "the washington post" says 53% of americans -- [inaudible] how long can you afford politically to have this hard line on those tax cuts for those making $250,000 or above? >> america faces a very serious problem. and our goal is to make sure it gets solved. we have a debt problem that is out of control. we've got to cut spending and i believe it's appropriate to put revenues on the table. now, the revenues we're putting on the table are going to come from, guess who? the rich.
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7